CHAPTER ONE. WHY DEMOCRACY FOR AMERICA SHOULD NOT SUPPORT OBAMA’S PUBLIC OPTION PLAN

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 10, 2009 6:10 AM PDT

Congress is reportedly considering a variety of universal health plan options that involve using multiple payer sources including a Medicare-like plan and traditional insurance offered by for-profit corporations. These plans are all supposed to offer similar benefits, but there is a huge debate as to whether the public option will have to be handicapped by regulations to decrease its efficiency to match the poor performance of private plans. 

We do not know the details of the negotiations because Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has closed the hearings after supporters of a single payer, Medicare for All plan tried to speak from the audience in the opening committee hearing.  Instead of being invited to join the negotiations, 13  patriots including doctors, nurses and lawyers were arrested and charged with trespassing for refusing to be silent in the face of this betrayal of the American taxpayer, including most of the millions of workers who were denied access to health care.

The Baucus 13 were forced to speak out  when Baucus refused to invite any single payer supporter to the hearing, which was dominated by representatives of the for-profit health care, insurance and pharmacy industries. 

The ostensible purpose of  the hearings is to come up with a plan that will provide health care to the millions of low and middle income wage earners whose taxes would disproportionately fund the resulting plan. Instead, experts in the economics of  single payer health care were excluded from the process of coming up with a plan. Predictably, this  will ultimately prove to be a bailout of the medical insurance industry that has caused the crisis. Perhaps it is not coincidental that these same industries gave a combined total of over 1.6 million dollars to Baucus during the previous Congress.

The public option will not work because Baucus and these lobbyists are not about to endorse a plan that will let the Medicare option outperform the private plans, as it would if it were operated as efficiently as possible. How could Medicare, with its three percent overhead not outcompete private insurance, which consumes 30 per cent of its revenue in administration, advertising, marketing and profits? 

The only reasons Medicare is so expensive is that 1) It covers the at-risk elderly and the much sicker patients who cannot get private insurance and 2) Since the passage of the Medicare Modernization Act, it has been burdened by partial privatization and the unsustainably expensive Part D medication plan that specifically bars the government from negotiating for favorable drug prices using its huge purchasing power. These problems can be corrected by incorporating what amounts to repeal of this law in the reform legislation. 

As an Oregonian, I cannot fail to note that our own Senator Wyden cast the final and deciding vote for this bill, despite strong Democratic opposition to this blatant gift to the private medical insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

The Medicare Modernization Act is a perfect example of what a Senate brought to us by corporate sponsors will produce when it is not watched closely by citizens. This is the reason we must educate ourselves about the options being considered by Congress and more importantly, the one that is being explicitly not considered, the single payer system. 

Polls show that this is the option favored by over 60% of the American public and 60% of physicians. These numbers are growing rapidly as universal insurance approaches reality and people are educating themselves about the costs and benefits of various proposals. The percentage of doctors favoring a single payer plan has increased by ten percentage points in just five years.

The public option plans are estimated to sacrifice over 80% of the savings achievable through a single payer plan in order to satisfy the corporate medical care industries that dictate policy to many of our Senators. Single payer achieves its efficiencies through a variety of means. 

It streamlines paperwork and would dramatically cut administrative costs to providers that currently consume 10 % of the health care dollar. It eliminates excessive insurance industry profits and all of their advertising and marketing expenses. It would lower administrative costs because government employees do not demand excessive salaries to serve the public. A single payer plan can monitor abuses of fee-for-service providers and administrators will have the mission of ensuring prompt payment to providers, rather than to repeatedly review claims to find loopholes to deny payment.


Most people do not realize that government is only expensive because we keep re-electing pork-loving politicians who reward their corporate masters with lavish contracts paid for by the taxpayer. If we paid more attention to what our Congressional representatives were doing and routinely got rid of those not serving the public interest, corporate money would be less influential. In other words, most of the blame for the exorbitant cost of government is ours.

We are not powerless. President Obama has told us that we must “be the change.” If we let our Congress know that we want single payer now through letters to newspapers, magazines and especially calls, emails and faxes to members of Congress, we can change minds by empowering more responsible members of Congress to resist lobbyist pressure. 

As for those who put corporate interests over those of citizens, we can send them an even stronger message in 2010 and 2012, when 2/3 of the senate will stand for re-election. While there are compelling reasons to oppose single-issue voting, the establishment of a single payer system is the defining civil rights issue that will tell us which members of Congress understand and believe in democracy and which do not.

Please learn more about the advantages of a single payer system of universal health care at the website of Physicians for a National Health Program.

Rick Staggenborg, MD


Physicians for a National Health Care Plan


Coos Bay, OR

CHAPTER TWO: THE REVOLUTION CONTINUES

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 17, 2009 7:55 PM PDT

This essay is dedicated to George Washington, whose personal integrity and faith in his cause and his countrymen led us miraculously to defeat a vastly superior British force, then to avoid the usual chaotic power struggles for a time after our revolution. 

Had we consistently followed Washington's example of dignified discourse and respect for all men as equals, the nation might have avoided falling into the state we found ourselves during the panic following 9/11 and the eight years of nightmare that ensued. 

Washington refused to torture in retaliation for British abuses of American patriots, setting an example that was followed until we came to be ruled by those who never learned the lessons of our proud history. Misplaced pride, indulgence of their perceived self interest and fear kept his successors from following his example. It is time that we remember why we fought a revolution.

THE AMERICAN STORY: PART I.  A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION

This is the first in a series of essays exploring the roots of American ideals through examination of our history. Too often political discourse takes place in a historical vacuum. We forget too easily that a people who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are condemned to repeat them. 

This does not imply that “history repeats itself.” This phrase is used by those who believe, or would like others to believe, that there is nothing that can be done to change the future. History is determined individuals who have a vision of the future. We must not let those motivated solely by their perceived self-interest dictate the fate of the United States and the world.

It is a national disgrace that failure to accurately recall our own history has caused us to lose our way in the advancement along the path of democracy that others nations have blazed, using as a guide the compass built by the Founders of our country. America has a proud heritage of leading the rest of the world in directions never seen before. Perhaps if we can agree on where we came from, we can more clearly see how to proceed together.

Most revolutions fail after a short time. The reason seems to be that revolutionaries have a disturbing tendency to attempt to exterminate dissidents in post-revolutionary purges. It is likely that the American Revolution seemed to succeed in large part because of the magnanimity of the colonial patriots after defeating the conservative Tories who had defended the English system of inherited wealth and privilege. 

Despite the fact that most of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence had been executed or financially ruined, the American revolutionaries did not follow the more modern practice of attempting to eliminate their former enemies. While most of the wealthy Tories escaped to Canada with the riches they had accumulated as a result of their loyalty to the Crown and there were reprisals against some of the more violent opponents of the Revolution, most of those who chose to stay were invited to join the new democratic Republic.

The debate about whether the people of such a large and diverse nation could govern themselves hinged on the question of whether men were good enough to do so responsibly. Conservatives who opposed revolution were largely followers of the doctrine of Hobbes, who described life then as “short, nasty and brutish” because of the essentially evil nature of man. 

Those supporting independence were more optimistic, believing not necessarily that mankind was perfectible but that in seeking always to form a more perfect union, America would always lead the world in advancing the cause of liberty. It is important to notice that this was a radical concept and by definition anything but conservative.

What modern "conservatives" apparently fail to realize is that the Founders did not think that they had designed a perfect government that should never change. This is why they built into the Constitution a means to change it. The doctrine of original intent promoted by the so-called "conservative" Heritage Foundation and some of our less intellectually honest Supreme Court justices is therefore incomprehensible. 

Jefferson argued in the Declaration of Independence that whenever government fails to represent the interests of the people, “it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.” The time has come not to abolish government but to alter it so that it serves the original intent of the Founders to protect the power of government from all usurpers who would exercise the tyranny of the majority or of the minority to advance their own selfish interests.


The Constitution itself was written precisely to succeed the original Articles of Confederation, which by establishing a confederation of sovereign states rather than a union had failed to create an effective government “of the people, by the people and for the people.” This early experiment had shown that a weak government cannot perform its essential functions of protecting citizens from abuse by the powerful and advancing the interests of the nation as a whole.


The power of the government is limited by the brilliant system of checks and balances built into the three branches of government. The Founders did not foresee that this nation would stray so far from its roots that its people would cede control of all three branches to a Party which argues that it cannot function effectively. It was clearly not their original intent that such cynics be given the reins of the government. We have witnessed the results of forgetting our history. It is important that we relearn them if we are to move forward as one People.

The Revolution has not ended. There have always been conservative elements who would let us give up our hard won freedoms in time of war. From John Adams and his Alien and Sedition Act to the Bush administration that has trashed our First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendment rights, nominally conservative counter-Revolutionaries have battled throughout history  to use the power of government itself to undermine the principles on which it was founded. Each time, there has arisen someone who opposed them and put the nation back on course.


From Thomas Jefferson to Teddy Roosevelt, great leaders have beat back the efforts of these counter-Revolutionaries. Unfortunately, the leaders opposing Revolutionary principles now use the fascist strategy of combining violence with corporate wealth and power to achieve their aims. They have used conservative businessmen like Rupert Murdoch to seize control of the media to propagandize and confuse our people, blinding them to the true nature of our history and allowing self-serving politicians cover to push the counter-Revolutionary agenda.


While some argued early on that President Obama had sold his soul to corporate interests, I tried to believe him when he told us repeatedly that he could not be the change, but that we have to be the change. Despite President Obama's many failures to address critical problems facing our nation, I still believe that when we expect the worst of our politicians, they tend to live down to our expectations in a tiresome self-fulfilling prophesy. If we collectively demand freedom from corporate control of the Senate and President Obama does not stand with us, then and only then will history have the right to judge him. 

The Revolution only began 234 years ago. It continues to this day. Which side are you on?










For those who love democracy, no one says better than Mick Jagger what our relationship to a democratic government should be:








I’ll never be your beast of burden.
My back is broad but it’s a hurting.
All I want is for you to make love to me.


I’ll never be your beast of burden.
I’ve walked for miles my feet are hurting.
All I want is for you to make love to me.


Am I hard enough?
Am I rough enough?
Am I rich enough?
I’m not too blind to see.


I’ll never be your beast of burden.
So let’s go home and draw the curtains.
Music on the radio,
come on baby make sweet love to me.


Am I hard enough?
Am I rough enough?
Am I rich enough?
I’m not too blind to see.


Oh little sister,
pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, girl.
You’re a pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty girl.
Pretty, pretty,
such a pretty, pretty, pretty girl.
Come on baby please, please, please.


I’ll tell ya,
you can put me out
on the street;
Put me out
with no shoes on my feet,
but, put me out, put me out,
put me out of misery.


Yeah, all your sickness
I can suck it up.
Throw it all at me,
I can shrug it off.
There’s one thing baby
that I don’t understand.
You keep on telling me
I ain’t your kind of man.


Ain’t I rough enough, ooh baby?
Ain’t I tough enough?
Ain’t I rich enough, in love enough?
Ooh! ooh! Please.


Ill never be your beast of burden.
Ill never be your beast of burden.
Never, never, never, never, never, never, never be.


I don’t need no beast of burden.
I need no fussing,
I need no nursing.
Never, never, never, never, never, never, never be.






To learn more about the single payer model of universal health care or to join Physicians for a National Health Plan or its sister organization Health Care Now, go to  the PNHP website. 

The economic benefits of a single payer system are compared to the 2010 Democratic medical insurance "reform" bill in Appendices I and II.






Rick Staggenborg, MD


Coos Bay, Oregon

CHAPTER THREE. WHY THE PUBLIC OPTION WON’T WORK: HOW SINGLE PAYER WILL SAVE DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 21, 2009 7:40 AM PDT

This essay is dedicated to James Madison, chief architect of the American Constitution.

Americans need to know that Congress is refusing to consider the single payer approach to universal health care for a reason: Max Baucus and other key committee members writing the legislation refuse to betray the interests of medical insurance industry lobbyists. Go to opensecrets.com and see for yourself how Baucus received 1.65 million from these corporate interests to come up with an expensive taxpayer bailout of the failing private insurance industry.

Democratic senator Charles Schumer  has announced his intention to refuse to vote for any public option plan that does not force the public option to be handicapped in such a way that it will not compete with private insurance plans using its inherent cost advantages. The result is that tens of millions of Americans will continue to suffer from lack of insurance or underinsurance.

The whole point of health care reform is not just to provide universal access to health care, but to do so in a sustainable way. We cannot afford to continue to sacrifice our children's future for the sake of the profits of these soulless corporate entities. It was a group of particularly fallible men on a previous Supreme Court that erroneously or deliberately decided that corporations have all the rights of citizens. 

Some of us find convincing Jeffrey Toobin's argument that the current court has so little respect for precedent that the rule of law itself is threatened. Fortunately, more recent decisions suggest that they have begun to take their responsibilities more seriously. (Note to reader: This was written prior to the Citizens United decision).

Thank God that erroneously decided opinions can be reversed by a more enlightened Court. The legal argument that corporations are persons as referred to in the Fourteenth amendment and thus possess the rights of natural persons was not based on precedent and is incontrovertibly erroneous. The due process clause of the Fourteenth amendment clearly states that "All persons born or naturalized" in the United States are guaranteed all the rights of the Constitution. If corporations are born, then it seems that the government should be able to execute them for crimes against humanity, but this does not seem to be the case in the Incorporated States of America.


Corporate personhood has resulted in formerly illegal lobbying practices corrupting Congress and the Senate in particular. This Court must recognize the danger of discarding stare decisis, or We the People may have to call for a constitutional convention to restore the meaning of "person" under the Fourteenth amendment to its original, intuitively obvious meaning. The only other alternative is for Congress to pass such an amendment itself, which is clearly beyond the realm of the possible with this Congress.

It is not that all politicians are working against the public interest. Many understand the problem and want to stand up for single payer but are afraid to make themselves the target of smear campaigns by these ruthless advocates of naked greed. President Obama himself has repeatedly stated that the single payer plan is optimal but that he believes it is politically impossible. This may simply represent a failure of imagination. He is said to be a political chess grandmaster and I do not rule out the possibility that he foresees the results of this blatant antidemocratic process and is waiting for the American people to rise up in righteous anger and "Be the change."

It makes little sense to me to hold the President responsible for failing to expect more out of this Congress, when he sees passage of some form of reform as critical to his ability to advance the rest of his domestic agenda. Whether or not he is considered sufficiently progressive by Democrats, the consequences of his being replaced by an even more neoconservative President with a veto pen would be disastrous, as recent history has demonstrated. 

Failure to recognize the culpability of a bought and paid for plurality in Congress would be a grave tactical error if progressives want to ever advance our cause. The only recourse is to follow the lead of Republicans and organize together to elect those Senators and Representatives who would best represent what we consider to be American principles. 

While some believe that the Democratic Party can be reformed just as the Republican Party was transformed into a blatant arm of the corporatocracy, human nature suggests that true change will only come from outside the Party. It is clear that its leadership feels that cooperation with the corporate interests that now control the political process is in their own best interests. I am sure that they believe that this is the only way to represent the People against corporate power, but their actions belie their stated intentions.

I believe that President Obama will withhold his support of single payer until the public stands up as one and demands it. This is our chance to prove that despite a dysfunctional Congress, we still have the power to take back the American government and demand that it serves the interest of the people it is supposed to represent.

Will we have a government of the people, by the people and for the people or will we simply continue to shrug and drop out of the political process in despair of the prospect of taking back our government from corporate rule? Our task is to build a movement that will take to the streets and demand that the interests of the People be given precedence to those of the corporate sponsors of campaigns for our Congressional representatives. Failure to do this would be to surrender the fight to restore democracy in America.

We need to write, call, fax and email our Congressmen and demand single payer now. If a complicated and expensive substitute is created now, we will eventually have to borrow more money from China to finance it, since there is no constituency willing to bear the burden of paying the ever-increasing cost of a multipayer system accessible to all and there is no way to prevent cost inflation in such a system. China has already indicated its hesitancy to continue financing our profligate ways. Wake up, America! We have no real choice. When the average income is projected to equal the average individual insurance premium by 2025 at current rates of growth, we must have single payer and no other form of health care reform.

It is ironic that the birthplace of modern democracy has ceded its leadership role to the former monarchies of Europe who have been able to achieve this obvious means of providing what the UN has declared is a human right. We have to stand up to the fundamentalists of the cult of Ayn Rand and prove to them that they are wrong. The pursuit of individual self interest is ultimately destructive. Just look at what it has done to the world economy if you still need proof.

Get off your knees and join the fight to preserve democracy in America. There is no use  praying that our President expend some of his enormous political capital to give us real health reform or that he would find the Senate receptive if he tried.

To paraphrase the immortal words of Jack Crabb in the classic movie "Little Big Man" as he simply used the truth to set up his revenge against the arrogant and cocksure General Custer: "You go, General. You go into the streets of America with your army of corrupt and cowardly Congressman armed only with corporate blood money. You are going to be facing millions of angry Americans. These ain’t helpless men, women and children. Them are American warriors, brave and true. They are going to fight to the death to protect their children's future. So you go, general. You go out there and see what happens."

Rick Staggenborg, MD


Physicians for a National Health Plan


Coos Bay, OR

CHAPTER FOUR. THE INTERNET IS THE NEXT STAGE IN HUMAN EVOLUTION

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 23, 2009 6:13 AM PDT

This essay is dedicated to William Gibson, one of the finest of today's science fiction writers and a visionary of the near future.



When I was young, I used to laugh at the notion that we are still evolving. Drawings on the cover of science fiction dime novels showed future men with swollen brain cases making their heads look vaguely like mushrooms. The effect was as comical as the idea itself. 

I reasoned that if evolution is driven by survival of the fittest, surely our bodies could not be evolving because we had evolved to the point where selective pressures no longer operated. The proof was in longer life expectancy and the defeat of many diseases that had formerly weeded out those with less fortunate genetic endowments.

As I grew older and found my time occupied with more serious studies, I regretfully put aside these fascinating stories of worlds of the future and prepared myself for my personal future. Now, with my formal education long behind me, I find myself reading more about current threats to human survival that make me question my earlier assumption that human evolution has ceased. I have recently realized that this requires an important paradigm shift.

There are many threats to human life on this planet that the less reality challenged among us have begun to face. Chief among these is global climate change. We have depended on the energy of the sun for our growth and survival since before life was merely blue-green algae, a scum formed from the primordial ooze. At that time it covered the Earth’s oceans, deriving our sustenance directly from the sun through the miraculous process of photosynthesis. Lacking minds or souls, we could not imagine that God had looked upon the void and said “Let there be light.”

As life on Earth gradually evolved into its more familiar forms, we now are beginning to realize that our unchecked growth is becoming like a cancer on our mother, Gaia. The ruthless mathematics of exponential growth is causing us to approach what mathematicians call an asymptote. In more familiar terms, human life threatens to reach the stage where if we were still algae, we would soon form an algal bloom. Most of us are familiar with this phenomenon, which results in an apparently clear body of water turning green (or red, depending on the sunlight converting pigment of the particular species) overnight.

This cannot happen with human life. Humans are not capable of unchecked growth forever leading to a sudden limit on further growth in the population. The smooth graphs illustrating exponential growth are but a model and an asymptotic curve eventually rises to infinity at a nearly instantaneous rate. This is but another example of how models fail to reflect reality. 

Unfortunately, this is not simply an intellectually challenging exercise of developing a more complex equation to describe the phenomenon. The failure to grasp the implications of this reality threatens the survival of all advanced forms of life on Earth.

As the population rises, selective pressures again emerge to slow its growth. This has given us some breathing room to solve the problem. Unfortunately, millions have died and will die from disease, pandemic, environmental change, war and pestilence as a result of our neglect of the problem for the decades since it was first recognized. 

I recall reading in my youth that we would by now have developed interstellar travel, which would have allowed us to relieve this pressure by populating other planets, Terraforming them if necessary. Because we have devoted our resources to war and the accumulation of wealth, that time is a long way off. Meanwhile, the population bomb continues to tick.

You may think, what can we do to prevent this apparently inevitable fate? The answer comes in the realization that we have not yet grown as a species beyond our adolescence. Only when humanity begins to function as a single organism, like the algae that once covered the planet, will we be able to avert catastrophe and save ourselves. Despite the prayers of millions, Jesus will not come down from the skies to save us. If God created us, it endowed us with reason and free will so that we might save ourselves from the disasters of our own making that now threaten our survival.

You might ask yourself how we can hasten our evolution and become adults who take responsibility for their actions before it is too late to save ourselves from self-destruction. After all, the more mature among us realize that every action has repercussions that affect others immediately but eventually affect ourselves as well. Unfortunately, too many humans never fully mature morally, a prerequisite for understanding the problem and its solution. 

Intelligence agencies use the term blowback to refer to the predictable consequences of their actions to innocent bystanders. When the consequences of human actions are unexpected and influenced by seemingly random events, we refer to them as being due to the butterfly effect. This is based on the idea that the beating of a butterfly's wings can have an effect on local weather patterns which can have effects that  change weather patterns worldwide. Thus, simple disturbances in the existing order can produce effects that can be as profound as they are unpredictable. 

The butterfly effect explains many things, from the consistent failure of self-interested U.S. meddling in the affairs of other nations to the repeated collapse of the world economy. However, the regular expansion and bursting of bubbles seems to indicate contrary to popular belief, these are not random events, but blowback that Goldman Sachs and its favored associates consider acceptable collateral damage to the American and world economies and to the Peoples who depend on the ability to earn a living wage in an economic environment increasingly hostile to life as we know it. 

Whether due to blowback or random events, both war and boom-bust cycles result from the short sighted actions of an economic elite that worships Ayn Rand and regards life’s purpose as the lowly pursuit of personal wealth and pleasure.  It seems that the generals in this game of economic warfare do not consider the possibility of a global economic winter if they implode the American economy.

For those unfamiliar with the malignant teachings of the misguided prophet Ayn Rand, she postulated that it is the nature of every biological organism to pursue naked self -interest in order to further the propagation of its species at the expense of others.  She fostered a movement to justify selfishness that assumed almost religious fervor in the last three decades that have brought the United States and world economies to a virtual collapse as a result of blind faith in the God of greed. 

Among her acolytes was former Fed chief Alan Greenspan, whose faith in the invisible hand of the market caused him to refuse to regulate the derivatives that were at the heart of the global economic meltdown.  The Pnzi scheme of mortgaging houses to high risk buyers was brought down by the first shift of the economic winds like the house of cards that it was.

If we are to solve the many problems threatening human civilization we must understand the danger in accepting her assertion that radical individualism is the way of nature. We cannot accept that the treatment of life as a game won by accumulating the most toys by the time we die is a good and natural thing. I will not bother to cite the many counterexamples that refute Rand's silly assertions. Thom Hartmann has already eloquently addressed this in The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight. I refer the interested reader to it for a powerful but frightening explanation of the details of what I am attempting to describe. 

We are beginning to grasp the consequences of the actions of the rigid fundamentalists believers in the discredited faith of the free market economy. They have tried to proselytize the tenets of a Satanic religion that worships greed and selfishness. The assumptions Rand made have become part of the collective consciousness of the electronic herd that has driven our economy once more to the brink of its destruction. If we cannot change the perception that it is human nature to think only of ourselves, it seems unlikely that human civilization will survive in a form that we recognize.

The implication of my thesis is that our economy must radically change in order to produce a just world order that will assure the survival of the human race. A fundamentalist Christian fearing Armageddon  might be tempted to imagine that Rand is the Antichrist. Prophets have told us that the world will end in fire andiIt is not hard to imagine that global climate change might be metaphorically described in this way. If Rand's thesis is not challenged, unrestrained greed may lead to a literal Hell on Earth.  


We have to believe that the predicted end of the world is not a promise but a warning. Perhaps if we can come to a new understanding of our relationship to the Earth and to each other, the world will indeed end, only to be replaced by a new and better one. Just as we create our own individual reality in the privacy of our minds, we can consciously create a new reality of the world in the higher mind that is the human collective consciousness, if we so choose.

We have the tool in hand that will assure our survival. It is the Internet. Through this instrument, mankind can rapidly reverse its slide down a slippery slope toward its self-destruction. Like most things, it is not inherently good or evil but a tool that we must individually and collectively decide to use for one or the other. Used for the good of Mankind, it can produce an exponential rate of change in the shared belief system of Mankind for the better, the like of which the world has never seen.

The beauty of the internet is that it has caused a connection of human minds and information around the planet such as never existed before. Used as a tool to manipulate investor greed, it can cause convulsions in the stock market and destroy national economies. Used as a tool to work together to drastically change the power structure by allowing people all over the planet to plan together to end corporate domination in a fascist New World Order, it can be our salvation. 

If the collective consciousness of man is connected through the internet, there is the potential to create a tectonic paradigm shift in human consciousness. If we are approaching asymptotic growth in this process we may see that the End of the World is not a catastrophe but a new beginning for Mankind.

One can think of the Internet as a vast, somewhat disordered mind. As it begins to reach its potential it assumes the nature of an intelligence, bringing together the neurons of our individual brains to form a superbrain, from which arises a collective consciousness which can direct itself toward solving the many problems besetting us. 

New thoughts can propagate at the speed of light, spreading like a wave if the right individuals can be reached. The idea of six degrees of separation can be used to amplify the message by utilizing the interconnectedness of all of us through nodes in the network that are the most highly connected individuals. Such rapid evolution is our best hope of saving ourselves from the threats that at this point appear obvious to most thinking people and unavoidable to those who have already given up hope in the essential goodness of mankind. 

It is not too late to change the course of history if we can learn to abandon the conflict model of change and work together in enlightened self interest to create a better world for our children.

Please go to the International Planned Parenthood website and give generously.






Rick Staggenborg, MD


Coos Bay, Oregon

CHAPTER FIVE. HOW WE WILL BECOME THE DOCTORS WHO HEAL OURSELVES

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 25, 2009 9:07 AM PDT

What motivates people to work for change is the awareness that we have the power to make the world a better place if we put our minds to it and spend our time working for the betterment of everyone. The most effective agents of this change realize our interconnectedness and try to order our efforts to maximize the effectiveness of our labor. 

The Internet has been a powerful tool in this regard. It can serve to isolate those who do not recognize that the only real purpose worth valuing is to work for the benefit of mankind, but overall its effect has been positive. Our attitude is not altruism, but the simple recognition that since we are all connected, our actions ultimately benefit ourselves and those who we love. 

If we take the time to care for each other, it is not only satisfying but multiplies our own pleasure as we see the effects of our efforts making the lives of both ourselves and others easier and less painful. Our intent is to do the same for those who do not see the caring for of others as their duty and even if they do not appreciate that it is our intent to make their lives better. It is important that we keep this in mind and respect those who disagree with us as we strive to open their minds to new possibilities. 

We must listen to those who see the world differently as well. It is important to emphasize our common goals as we discuss how to move forward together into a more just and secure future for our children. We must respect the ideas and values of others even if we disagree if we want them to be  more receptive to our own ideas. It is critical to remember that we are all more alike than otherwise and it is these commonalities that make us human. 

By approaching the task of healing America with respect and civility, we accelerate the process. We cannot afford to continue to use a conflict model to resolve what has become a very uncivil war if we want to solve the problems while there is still time to save the United States from economic and moral destruction. While our Congress excuses its every failure to put the interests of the People of the United States over those of their corporate patrons, other problems threaten the survival of human civilization as we know it.

Effective doctors have many essential qualities. They must have empathy, analytic ability, willingness to listen, good communication skills and above all, a single minded dedication to the patient. To apply these skills, doctors must be willing to dedicate themselves to the task of becoming familiar with the scientific evidence for the causes and treatments of the ills to which humans are subject. 

It takes all of the energy of the effective doctor to help our increasingly ill and undertreated patients. When the problem outstrips our knowledge of proper treatment, the doctor must apply skillful listening and active observation, then apply deductive skills to use their knowledge base to solve the problems of the individual patient.

At some point the question becomes, who is the patient? To be most effective, the doctor must be physically and psychologically healthy to withstand the pressures of the job. Like the familiar warning that adults must put on their own oxygen masks in an airplane decompression before attempting to assist others, we must first attend to our own needs, whatever they may be. 

Fortunately, this is easy when the doctor enjoys the work. When this happens it does not seem like work at all, but becomes pure pleasure. This does not mean that we are indifferent to the pain and suffering of our charges. The doctor must learn early on that at this stage in the history of medicine, we cannot save every individual patient. The heartache of our failures spurs us on to ever greater efforts to improve the effectiveness of our methods.

Once we understand how to prepare ourselves for this awesome responsibility, we turn our attention fully to the patient before us. In the case of non-physicians, the patient is mankind. To address the illnesses of contemporary society, we must become lay doctors who can apply the art and science of modern medicine to social ills. 

The first step is to develop a problem list. The doctor then attempts to narrow this list to a set of likely diagnoses. This requires deciding which problems are manifestations of the same underlying cause, and formulating a treatment plan to address each of the derangements of the body’s systems. The treatment approach needs to be carefully considered so that its elements complement each other, rather than causing so many side effects that the treatment is worse than the illness.

With all this in mind, we are now prepared to formulate an action plan to maximize the good we can accomplish for our patient, who is all of us. I will now share with you my proposed treatment plan, developed in consultation with hundreds of other doctors, physicians and non-physicians alike. It is based on an understanding that the sequence of treatment interventions is critically important when operating on such a sick patient, all of whose problems are interrelated. Only by utilizing a holistic approach can we hope to be most effective in the daunting task of treating our critically ill patient.

I propose that we use a system based approach. We must treat the most life threatening problems first, while simultaneously supporting the patient by strengthening its defenses against disease. I suggest that we begin by focusing on restoring to health the democratic system that our Revolutionary forefathers gave birth to so long ago. 

In those days, birth was a very dangerous experience. The life expectancy of nascent democracies was limited, most previous attempts having died young. While our Republic has survived to adolescence, it is like the cystic fibrosis patient who is not expected to live beyond young adulthood despite our best efforts, due to a genetic defect which we have not learned to cure.

Eventually, cystic fibrosis patients must be maintained on oxygen as their lungs succumb to the ravages of the disease. It is tragic, and one of modern medicine's greatest challenges. What a breakthrough it would be if these patients could be made to breathe life-giving fresh air and live healthy, full lives for the allotted fourscore and ten or more that most of us take for granted.

I can only outline the basic treatment approach in this brief progress note. I will try to summarize its elements here and expand upon them in future entries. Remember, this is only a preliminary treatment plan, subject to revision after careful consideration of the effects of the initial interventions. The rational physician must always take into account that we are only humans, and sometimes we must trust in forces greater than ourselves to help us save the patient.

If we succeed in restoring the democratic system to health, our patient will be able to withstand the stressful and sometimes dangerous interventions we must make in our attempts at cure. The treatment consists of cutting out the corruption by corporate money of our increasingly partisan Congress. The process will be painful to politicians and their partisan supporters who do not accept this as an inescapable part of the treatment. Like a pregnant patient terrified of the birth process, they will find that the rebirth of democracy will only be made more painful to them if they struggle against the inevitable.

Once the patient that is America is stabilized by a transfusion of democracy we can turn our attention to the critical problem of maintaining thermoregulatory homeostasis. In layman’s terms, this means that we have to address global climate instability. In doing so, we must intervene on a global level that some fear may require shock treatment to restore the healthy pulse of the global economy. However, more holistic thinkers realize that transforming our energy economy to a more stable system of sustainable, nonpolluting and decentralized production and distribution is the optimal course of treatment for this problem.

The heart of the economy has been damaged by the viral illness of unrestrained greed, amplified by the inhuman growth factor of globalization and a market that is anything but free. The heart of the global economy has been weakened by this virus and will never return to its former functioning. 

Like the patient who has survived viral cardiomyopathy, the only cure is transplant. This is futile however, if the virus cannot be held in check. There does not seem to be a cure in sight for viral infections, but we have learned to control them. The senseless suffering and premature deaths of early AIDS patients was not entirely in vain, for we began to address our societal homophobia and developed treatment to address this scourge, which was initially thought to only affect gays. 

As we carry out our treatment, we must not neglect to assure that it is available to everyone, through a system of truly universal health care which is the only treatment for our ailing health care system that the weakened heart of the global economy can tolerate. The prescription is single payer health care. This treatment must be made available to all nations. As in the case of the decompressing airplane on which we all travel, the US must assume the role of the adult and put its own oxygen mask on before it can help others.

With the heart of democracy healthy, we will be free to address the underlying cancer that will make all our efforts in vain if not addressed. Humans cannot continue to reproduce exponentially without destroying the source of their sustenance as a cancer eventually outgrows its blood supply. It is clear that this will require radical intervention. 

The surgical treatment is brutal, cutting out large parts of the body to save the rest, while leaving a scarred and functionally damaged patient. The scalpel used would be war, famine, pestilence and disease. If this is the only treatment that we have to offer, then the patient should be informed of his right to euthanasia. The only alternative is to find an effective medical treatment. This is a problem whose solution merits intensive research to find an early cure, before millions more succumb to the disease of unrestrained greed.

Shalom, salaam, peace.


Rick Staggenborg, MD


Physicians for a National Health Plan


Soldiers For Peace International

CHAPTER SIX. THE MEDICAL APPROACH TO TREATING THE WORLD HAS THE SIDE EFFECT OF ENDING WAR

 



Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on Jun 25, 2009 2:10 PM PDT

One of the more stubborn symptoms of the viral illness of greed is war. It results from parts of the body attempting to fight off perceived threats that it sees as arising from foreign bodies. When all parts of the human body are working as one, such problems do not arise. When it occurs, this “immune” reaction inevitably causes damage to the human body itself. This requires a slower, more organized healing process. As a result of this process, the body remodels itself. Healing often leaves scars, but occasionally it produces better functioning of the body as a whole.

Medicine often finds the means to relieve symptoms of an illness with medications targeted at what appears to be an entirely unrelated condition. These ”side effects” occasionally even treat the underlying condition, through pure serendipity. An example is the way lithium was found to control the overexcitement driving mania, when Jonathan Cade was experimenting with various salts of lithium in an attempt to find a way to treat gout.

In a similar manner, through our attempts to treat the seemingly unrelated problems of environmental degradation, poverty and disease, we will find the solution to the problem of war. Conflict will no longer seem the inevitable result of the animal struggle for individual survival when humanity realizes that the individual good is inevitably served best through ensuring the welfare of all. 

We must understand why the Bible teaches that Cain slew Abel only after Man submitted to the temptations of the evil influence to take what it did not need, giving in to a momentary impulse toward self indulgence. This resulted in the allegorical banishment of Mankind from the Garden of Eden, where all things had previously dwelt in harmony. The religious impulse is driven by a heartfelt desire to return to a world where all may reside in peace and comfort, free of the fear of want that drives us to fight. 

When we accept the simple truth that enlightened self interest will rid us of all the evils plaguing us and free us from our self-imposed Hell, we will once more have peace on Earth. To put it in religious terms, we will have established God’s kingdom on Earth. Once again, let us realize that the terror of Armageddon was not a prophecy of God’s will, but a warning of the inevitable result of choosing evil over good. It is literally true that greed is the root of all evil.

If we work together, we can develop a plan to escape self destruction. The threats of war, famine, disease and pestilence now threaten the survival of Mankind. It is now or never, folks. Will we choose to follow the impulses of our Ids or choose to act according to the dictates of our superegos, and direct our egos to the task of survival? We have some collective growing up to do. I

f there is a Heavenly father, he can only shake his figurative head and pray that his progeny choose to make the right decisions for their selves. That is the nature of free will, and the only way that we can grow up and become strong men and women who take responsibility for their own actions, or accept the consequences of our failure to do so.

Rick Staggenborg, MD


Somewhere in the inland passage, Alaska

CHAPTER SEVEN. THE WAR TO END ALL WAR: SOLDIERS FOR PEACE

Written by: Rick Staggenborg, MD on May 28, 2009 7:00 AM PDT

It is fair to describe the battle for single payer as the opening clash in the War to Take Back America from the junta of transnational corporations that has seized it. To paraphrase Joseph McCarthy, we are developing a list of subversives within the United States Congress who are aiding and abetting the enemy during this time of war. 

At the top of the list at this moment is Max Baucus, alleged Democrat from Montana and current chairman of the Senate Finance committee. He is the most luridly visible symbol of the corruption that has seized control of our government. After receiving 1.65 million dollars from insurance, pharmaceutical and corporate medical interests from 2003 until the time of his re-election, he is now leading the forces of counter-Revolutionaries who are trying to stave off our assault on the corporatocracy. 

This mindless Machine is desperately trying to cling to its death grip on our revered institutions, mindless of the collateral damage that they are inflicting on citizens of America and the world. In drawing a Maginot line around the Finance committee that is crafting health care “reform” legislation, he is making a tactical error. The generals in our gathering Army are preparing a flanking movement which will ultimately ensure his defeat in this skirmish.

Wars are won by disciplined forces coordinating to carry out an overall strategy with defined aims and proven tactics. The most effective commanders are students of military history who are capable of learning from the failures as well as the successes of others. In this war, we must carefully study the history of the continuing American Revolution and the mistakes that we have made in recent years in fighting it. 

There is a danger in thinking that our early successes against arrogant, unimaginative British colonialists means that we are ultimately guaranteed success against those counter-Revolutionaries who have spent decades preparing for an all-out assault on our nation. It is our good fortune that like all men of evil intent, they are too confident that others share their fearful world view and will fall in line if they present themselves as benevolent protectors against imagined threats from without.

We must not succumb to the conceit that we can win because we are smarter than the enemy. While this may be true, it will only be so as long as we keep our motivation pure. We must always put the goals of the movement and the interests of those for whom we fight above our own. 

Remember that when the great question of whether a people could govern themselves, the issue hinged on whether that people was virtuous enough to esteem the common good over self interest. At that time, the battle lines were clearly drawn. Those who believed that man was inherently selfish became the conservative Tories, while the patriot radicals who believed in the benevolent nature of Man went on to victory, at great cost in lives and personal fortune. George Washington, our first commander in chief, is rightly revered for embodying this principle. We must honor their sacrifice and carry on the battle for the soul of America.

Our grand strategy is thus as simple as it is clear. Armed only with the truth, we must bring the people of America back to the future. We will enlist an educated force who will teach our people about what America truly means and carry the banner of the American flag proudly before us as we lead our growing Army to victory. 

We can only lose if we falter in our conviction out of perceived self interest. We must always remember that our interests are only preserved by defending the interests of all. Using the classic British tactic of dividing and conquering, we can use our opponents’ beliefs against them. As we attack the enemies of freedom in a systematic fashion, one by one these alliances of convenience will fall apart, as each tribe seeks to preserve its own privilege and power.

While every Army needs its commanders, no victory is achieved without the efforts of the disciplined foot soldier. While our Minutemen bravely face the power of the disciplined Army of invaders who hold Washington, others must persuade the common citizen to enlist in our cause. Our immediate task is to go to the cities and the country alike and seek out those people of faith whose belief in the rightness of the American cause of democracy has never wavered. As we proceed, remember that no man can be left behind.

In the words of Johnnie Horton:






In 1814 we took a little trip,


along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Mississip.
We took a little bacon and we took a little beans
and we caught the bloody British in the town of New Orleans.




We fired our guns and the British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.


We looked down the river and we see'd the British come.
And there must have been a hundred of'em beatin' on the drum.
They stepped so high and they made the bugles ring.
We stood by our cotton bales and didn't say a thing.


We fired our guns and the British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.


Old Hickory said we could take 'em by surprise
if we didn't fire our muskets 'til we looked 'em in the eye
We held our fire 'til we see'd their faces well.
Then we opened up with squirrel guns and really gave 'em ... well.


We fired our guns and the British kept a'comin.


There wasn't nigh as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.


Yeah, they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles
and they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go.
They ran so fast that the hounds couldn't catch 'em,
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.


We fired our cannon 'til the barrel melted down.
So we grabbed an alligator and we fought another round.
We filled his head with cannon balls, and powdered his behind
and when we touched the powder off, the gator lost his mind.


We fired our guns and the British kept a'comin.


There wasn't nigh as many as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.




Yeah, they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles
and they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go.
They ran so fast that the hounds couldn't catch 'em,
down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico.




Rick Staggenborg, MD


Coos Bay, OR